Legal claims defining the scope of protection, as filed with the USPTO.
1. A computer-implemented method for risk evaluation, the method comprising: using a system, wherein the system comprises a processor, a computer-readable medium, and distinct software modules embodied on the computer-readable medium, and wherein the distinct software modules when executed cause the processor to perform: accessing an object, stored in a memory, wherein the object is a component of a score-card and includes an object risk status and an object measure-value; receiving an assignment structure; assigning, based on the assignment structure, at least one risk to the object, wherein each risk includes a plurality of threat levels and an expectation value derived from the plurality of threat levels; receiving a probability for each threat level within each assigned risk, wherein the probability is associated with a deviation-value of the object measure-value; defining a probability distribution matrix based on the plurality of threat levels within each risk, wherein the matrix comprises a row for each threat level and each row includes the threat level, the deviation-value, and the probability, the deviation-value having a value type selected from the group of absolute number, absolute delta, percentage and percentage delta; determining the expectation value for each risk based on the probability distribution matrix; determining the object measure-value based on the expectation-value of each risk; determining the object risk status using pre-defined rules and based on an aggregation of each expectation-value corresponding to each risk assigned to the object; storing the object in the memory in response to determining the object risk status; and presenting the object-measure value and the object risk status.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the expectation-value step comprises: multiplying the deviation-value with the probability in each row of the probability distribution matrix corresponding to the risk; and adding the results of the multiplying step.
3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the determining the expectation-value step comprises: multiplying the deviation-value with the probability in each row of the probability distribution matrix corresponding to the risk; and adding the results of the multiplying step.
4. The method of claim 1 , comprising: providing at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and aggregating the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
5. The method of claim 1 , comprising: providing at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and aggregating the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
6. The method of claim 2 , comprising: providing at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and aggregating the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
7. The method of claim 3 , comprising: providing at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and aggregating the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
8. A method as in one of claims 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , and 7 , wherein the object comprises at least one of strategy, strategy-element, perspective, objective, target and measure.
9. A method as in one of claims 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , and 7 , wherein the at least one risk is a component of a risk-catalogue.
10. A computer-readable medium storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform a method of risk evaluation, the method comprising: accessing an object, stored in memory, wherein the object is a component of a score-card and includes an object risk status and an object measure-value; receiving an assignment structure; assigning, based on the assignment structure, at least one risk to the object, wherein each risk includes a plurality of threat levels and an expectation value derived from the plurality of threat levels; receiving a probability for each threat level within each assigned risk, wherein the probability is associated with a deviation-value of the object measure-value; defining a probability distribution matrix based on the plurality of threat levels within each risk, wherein a row is created in the matrix for each threat level and each row includes the threat level, the deviation-value, and the probability, the deviation-value having a value type selected from the group of absolute number, absolute delta, percentage and percentage delta; determining the expectation value for each risk based on the probability distribution matrix; determining the object measure-value based on the expectation-value of each risk; determining the object risk status using pre-defined rules and based on an aggregation of each expectation-value corresponding to each risk assigned to the object; storing the object in the memory in response to determining the object risk status; and presenting the object-measure value and the object risk status.
11. The computer-readable medium of claim 10 , wherein the instructions for determining the expectation-value comprise: multiplying the deviation-value with the probability in each row of the probability distribution matrix corresponding to the risk; and adding the results of the multiplying step.
12. The computer-readable medium of claim 10 , comprising instructions for: providing at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and aggregating the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
13. The computer-readable medium of claim 11 , comprising instructions for: providing at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and aggregating the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
14. A risk evaluation system comprising: at least one memory for storing an object, a risk at least one risk, and an assignment structure; at least one processor for executing program instructions for accessing an object, wherein the object is a component of a score-card stored by the at least one memory and includes an object risk status and an object measure-value, and assigning, based on the assignment structure, at least one risk to the object, wherein each risk includes a plurality of threat levels and an expectation value derived from the plurality of threat levels; a bus for receiving a probability for each threat level within each assigned risk, wherein the probability is associated with a deviation-value of the object measure-value; the at least one processor for executing program instructions for defining a probability distribution matrix based on the plurality of threat levels within each risk, wherein a row is created in the matrix for each threat level and each row includes the threat level, the deviation-value, and the probability, the deviation-value having a value type selected from the group of absolute number, absolute delta, percentage and percentage delta; the at least one processor for executing program instructions for determining the expectation value for each risk based on the probability distribution matrix; the at least one processor for executing program instructions for determining the object measure-value based on the expectation-value of each risk; the at least one processor for determining the object risk status using pre-defined rules and based on an aggregation of each expectation-value corresponding to each risk assigned to the object; and the bus for storing the object and presenting the object-measure value and the object risk status.
15. The system of claim 14 , wherein the at least one processor for executing program instructions for determining the expectation value executes program instructions for: multiplying the deviation-value with the probability in each row of the probability distribution matrix corresponding to the risk; and adding the results of the multiplying step.
16. The system of claim 14 , wherein the at least one memory stores at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and wherein the at least one processor executes program instructions to aggregate the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
17. The system of claim 15 , wherein the at least one memory stores at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and wherein the at least one processor executes program instructions to aggregate the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
18. The system of claim 15 , wherein the at least one memory stores at least a further score-card, wherein the further score-card is substantially equivalent to the score-card and has a similar object, which is similar to the object of the score-card; and wherein the at least one processor executes program instructions to aggregate the object measure-value into a corresponding object measure-value of the similar object.
19. A system as in one of claims 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 and 18 , wherein the at least one risk is a component of a risk-catalogue stored by the at least one memory.
Unknown
October 6, 2009
Browse 5M+ US patents with plain-English claim translations and AI-generated analysis.